[ad_1]
Divided government is when the executive branch is controlled by a different party than the legislative branch. The US government is structured with separation of powers between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. A unified government can easily pass legislation, but a divided government requires compromise. Some believe a divided government leads to gridlock, but successful administrations have been part of divided governments. The Watergate scandal occurred during a divided government, and some believe a unified government could lead to overgovernment.
A divided government, in the United States or in any similarly structured constitutional republic, is one in which executive authority is vested in a member of a party who does not have control of the legislative branch. For example, in the 1990s, the Democratic Party, headed by President Bill Clinton, retained control of Congress for only the first two years of Clinton’s two terms, resulting in a divided government for six of the eight years of the his presidency.
The United States government is structured on the principle of separation of powers, i.e. legislative authority is held by a single body &emdash; Congress &emdash; and executive authority, or the power to make, execute, and enforce laws enacted by the legislature, is held by the executive branch, which is headed by the president, who is both the head of government and the head of state. Bills passed by Congress are signed into law when signed by the president, or, in the event of his disapproval, on a 2/3 vote by each House of Congress, called an “override” of the president’s veto. The third branch of government, the judiciary, is made up of courts, whose duties include the responsibility for interpreting the laws and determining their consistency with the Constitution. The judiciary is considered impartial and disinterested, i.e., not motivated by partisan issues, at least in part because federal judges are not elected, but appointed for long terms, often for life.
When one party controls the White House and both houses of Congress, the government is “unified” and it is theoretically easy to pass and enact legislation due to shared goals by members of the same party. When the opposing party gains control of even one house of Congress, either the Senate or the House of Representatives, it gains the power to bring the government to a standstill by virtue of its ability to simply oppose any proposal from the president’s party .
Some people come to the conclusion that the framers of the US Constitution unwittingly established a governmental structure that would have become mired in gridlock and stagnation as the composition of the House and Senate changed every two years. Others cite the authors’ dislike of a strong central government, which helps explain why they should build a government that requires compromise between parties to achieve anything. To win opposition support for any legislation, the president’s party must negotiate with the opposition, and the opposition will never agree to any too blatant measure.
It has been suggested that a divided government is not desirable and that a unified government is preferable. An analysis of American government in the 20th century shows that for the first 20 years of the century, government was divided for only eight of those years. Further analysis shows that some of the most successful administrations in the 20th century, such as those of Presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, were part of divided governments, and some unified governments, such as Democratic rule in the second half of the 1955s and the President Lyndon Johnson’s administration has led to what many consider extreme overgovernment. Examples of this include the Democratic initiatives of the 1920s that were later declared unconstitutional and many of President Johnson’s “Great Society” bills that still cause controversy.
Furthermore, one of the most dramatic political scandals in American history, the Watergate scandal, occurred during a divided government and many have suggested that if President Richard Nixon’s Republican Party controlled Congress during that time, the investigations and revelations that led to the president’s resignation in the face of inevitable impeachment may never have taken place. Advocates of a divided government suggest that party loyalty and “discipline” could encourage congressmen to neglect in a president their own party behavior they would not accept in a president of the opposing party.
[ad_2]